Had the genders had been reversed, I would've called bullshit on it too. I don't think sexism cancels out in a kind of tit for tat manner! Even if the sexism was equal on both sides, which it isn't. These ads play on the greater pressure women are under to get an opposite sex partner.
I agree that instances of [any]-ism shouldn't cancel each other out, especially not when there's an imbalance in the equation. However, it does still tend to be a factor in how much things annoy me personally.
A different, but hopefully still relevant example that always comes to my mind when I think about this sort of thing is how I used to read in school about the truly horrible things that e.g. Dutch slaveholders used to do to slaves that had committed crimes (such as, oh say, trying to escape). It's the stuff of nightmares. Much later, I read a bit more about 17th century society, and learned that in many cases white criminals, even from the ruling classes, were treated in the same violent/vile matter.
I am fairly sure that these punishments were still applied much more enthusiastically, with greater frequency, and for lesser offences in the slave cases, but it has nevertheless caused me to adjust my mental model from "white people sure treated black slaves badly in those days" to "they certainly did, but heck, at least some of it's due to the fact that humans treated humans badly in those days."
Not sure if this is making any sense to you, but I somehow find the distinction important. Maybe I need to be sure I'm annoyed/offended/ashamed for exactly the 'right' reason.
[ I am, by the way, also quite annoyed with having to type this comment in a crappy little 10-line edit box in a browser window. Gods, I miss Usenet. Next time I think I'll just email you... ]
You're definitely making sense and a lot of the time I feel like that too. Other times, blog. :)
I've kinda let go of being annoyed for the "right reasons" for the purposes of this experiment, it wasn't the aim to have a well-balanced blog covering all the current feminist issues. It's interesting feeling free to just blurt something out without weighing up the big picture, if you see what I mean.
I'm sorry about the crappy commenting facilities, but this blog does appreciate the comment love. :) It's crap writing these posts on my phone too!
But lest you miss Usenet too much, I point out that this thread/blog would've been dead in the water already, had I'd been writing there.
4 comments:
I often (possibly even *more* often) see equivalent articles with the genders reversed so I wouldn't call this one sexist on that account.
Or are you considering the very fact that articles like that exist to be the sexism in question?
Had the genders had been reversed, I would've called bullshit on it too. I don't think sexism cancels out in a kind of tit for tat manner! Even if the sexism was equal on both sides, which it isn't. These ads play on the greater pressure women are under to get an opposite sex partner.
OK, I was just asking to be sure.
I agree that instances of [any]-ism shouldn't cancel each other out, especially not when there's an imbalance in the equation. However, it does still tend to be a factor in how much things annoy me personally.
A different, but hopefully still relevant example that always comes to my mind when I think about this sort of thing is how I used to read in school about the truly horrible things that e.g. Dutch slaveholders used to do to slaves that had committed crimes (such as, oh say, trying to escape). It's the stuff of nightmares. Much later, I read a bit more about 17th century society, and learned that in many cases white criminals, even from the ruling classes, were treated in the same violent/vile matter.
I am fairly sure that these punishments were still applied much more enthusiastically, with greater frequency, and for lesser offences in the slave cases, but it has nevertheless caused me to adjust my mental model from "white people sure treated black slaves badly in those days" to "they certainly did, but heck, at least some of it's due to the fact that humans treated humans badly in those days."
Not sure if this is making any sense to you, but I somehow find the distinction important. Maybe I need to be sure I'm annoyed/offended/ashamed for exactly the 'right' reason.
[ I am, by the way, also quite annoyed with having to type this comment in a crappy little 10-line edit box in a browser window. Gods, I miss Usenet. Next time I think I'll just email you... ]
You're definitely making sense and a lot of the time I feel like that too. Other times, blog. :)
I've kinda let go of being annoyed for the "right reasons" for the purposes of this experiment, it wasn't the aim to have a well-balanced blog covering all the current feminist issues. It's interesting feeling free to just blurt something out without weighing up the big picture, if you see what I mean.
I'm sorry about the crappy commenting facilities, but this blog does appreciate the comment love. :) It's crap writing these posts on my phone too!
But lest you miss Usenet too much, I point out that this thread/blog would've been dead in the water already, had I'd been writing there.
Post a Comment